Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Gamaustra's latest in its 'Analyze This' series asks the question point blank: Which Console Will 'Win' 2007? The regular series puts weighty questions to business analysts who specialize in the games industry, to get a gestalt opinion on what's really going on. The well-respected Michael Pachter, of Wedbush Morgan Securities, had some of the most interesting comments to review. He says that Nintendo will 'appear' to win in 2007 because of its low price and innovative control scheme, but that Sony will be the winner in the long run. From the article: "My best guess is that Sony emerges as the winner of the movie format war in late 2008, and games start looking noticeably better in 2009. That's when Sony starts looking like the winner of the next generation battle. All of this is pretty far out, and a lot can happen with pricing to change things. For example, if Sony gets down the cost curve for Blu-ray and Cell processors, [the PS3] may be below $300 shortly thereafter. It's hard to say that this will happen before 2009, but it could. That would change everything."

I am actually more interested about new game styles than new game console. The WII has added some new possibilities and shows potential, certainly looking more reliable than the camera games on my PS2 (The NIKE game. I am a master in karate according to that game by just flapping my arms up and down, lighting is nearly impossible to get correct, and the distance which you need between camera and screen varies all the time).

Ding! Some of them even get annoying after a while. While I love my Wii and think Wii Tennis is one of the most fun party games ever, I DON'T WANT to have to always be swinging that thing around (it got somewhat annoying in Zelda, and VERY annoying in Marvel). I'm doubting many games will be put out that doesn't involve the motion sensing, so I'm pretty much ruling out the Wii as my "just lay on the couch and chill" console.

But if Sony still has a couple of years to go before they get enough consoles out there, how will they hold on to developers and in particular exclusive titles? If a publisher can't count on selling half a million copies of an exclusive PS3 title to break even (games are costly to produce these days) by virtue of there not being enough PS3s out there to begin with (and you need far more than half a million PS3s of course), then that publisher will sign deals with Microsoft and Nintendo as well if not instead.

On top of that, with the money Sony is losing per console right now, they will have to sell a lot of games per console sold in order to break even. PS2 might be keeping SCE afloat, but I don't really see PS3 keeping a PS4 afloat at all considering how drastically the course of things would need to change.

Developers move like the wind - the system that makes money attracts them. Right now the Wii looks like it's doing well, and so does the 360. But that's not to say that in 2 years it will be the same. If the install base catches up, a game development business isn't a fanboy and will go along with whatever system makes them the most money, regardless of what their developers think. If the PS2 was so hard to develop for, how did it win the last generation? Because it had the largest install base and gua

What you described is *exactly my point.* One "hangs on" to developers, as I put it, by essentially promising them a return on investment (i.e. making money, just as you said). If there aren't enough PS3s on the market to guarantee a decent ROI, then developers will move -- like the wind, no less -- to Xbox and Wii:-P

That's not in any way true [yahoo.com]. Multiple Apple's sales by 3, and their profit by 4, and you got Sony. Sony has $32B in short term assets. Sony is quite healthy, financially. I don't know where you got your information.

Obviously you have no experience in the financial world whatsoever - a company the size of Sony, Apple, Nintendo, or Microsoft never has any idea of it's current financial position - it only has quarterly data that's put together a month or two after the fact at best - and since most companies have a funny fiscal year for tax purposes (my company starts it's new year on December 1st), you can never rely on this year's data as it's usually incomplete at best. If you want annual sales, you have to use the pr

My "half a million" number actually refers to the number of copies of a game that a publisher needs to sell to break even. I stated that Sony would need far more than that amount of consoles out there for this number to be realistic. (Since when has 100% of those who own a particular console bought a certain game for it?)As far as devs/publishers are concerned, it's *who* goes multiplatform that's important. Exclusive games by no-names, or even good but small companies, aren't nearly as big a deal as if, sa

All they have to do is cut the price in half and get more good games out. Lets see, if we use our friend history the PS2 took nearly four years to get to half price. So as we close in on 2011 the PS3 should hit that $300 price point he claims is needed. People just need to realize that this is an expensive piece of electronics and Sony can't cut the price to that point anytime soon. They will need something else to win.

Apples and oranges. The environment around the PS2 is much much different than PS3. Look at what the PS2 had to face in the Dreamcast, Xbox, Gamecube. There wasn't much difference in game quality, so the PS2 wasn't surpassed by anyone. There wasn't much difference in gametypes (Wii), so you could treat the systems as equals. The Gamecube was cheaper, but not by half. Factor in PS2 locking in GTAIII, GTIV, FFX all in the same year, and you've got a slam dunk. There was no stopping the PS2, so the bottom line: why cut the price when you're selling like hotcakes? You never really know how much they were making off each one, but given that they didn't need to chop the price down, why bother? In this case, they'll continue to lose money on each system but the price can come down faster. There's also the component cost: DVD wasn't super commonplace in 1999, but it wasn't brand new either. It had been out a few years and definately wasn't as new as Blu-Ray. The initial price drops in components as adoption speeds up are much higher than later on the lifetime of a technology in terms of percenteges. So given that, I can definately see the price coming down a lot faster than PS2.

That's my question too. "Winner" is pretty subjective. The original Xbox was arguably a pretty good buy if you liked certain types of games. If you happened to be an avoid PC RPG gamer who liked a lil console RPG on the side though it was an absolute disaster. Almost no RPG's worth playing and the ones that were came out for the PC where I could play them with real controls and high res.If they want to talk about money though it's obvious who's going to win. The Nintendo DS is already the reigning king

On what criteria do we evaluate a winner? Consoles sold, games sold, profits? It makes a difference, does it not?

I think generally the "winner" is essentially the market share leader (which obviously is tied to consoles sold).

Now granted, you could argue that it should probably be tied to profits, since this is a business we are talking about. However, that's a bit difficult seeing how there's much more to MS and Sony than just their game units (MGS is notorious for losing the company money), so they can a

I think generally the "winner" is essentially the market share leader (which obviously is tied to consoles sold).

Perhaps the real question is whether or not there will be a loser in this round. Whereas the previous generation had a real loser in the Dreamcast, will this generation see one of the "Big Three" falling down substantially?

Some people conveniently forget the Dreamcast and call the Gamecube the loser of the previous generation, but as you mentioned, this is a business we're talking about, and

Perhaps the real question is whether or not there will be a loser in this round. Whereas the previous generation had a real loser in the Dreamcast, will this generation see one of the "Big Three" falling down substantially?

Some people conveniently forget the Dreamcast and call the Gamecube the loser of the previous generation, but as you mentioned, this is a business we're talking about, and the Gamecube didn't lose Nintendo any money.

I think asking "Is there a loser?" is an interesting question. You could

I have to agree, I'm not sure anyone can "lose" this generation aside from Sony.No one doubts Nintendo would make money and gobs of it, even if the Wii only had half the market share it had last time. Everyone knows Nintendo is very good at making money.

No one doubts Microsoft will keep plugging along. Even if they don't make money they've garnered a place in the industry and aren't likely to give it up. Even should they get thoroughly trumped later, they'll come back.

Directly contradicting this story, I read the print edition of the Wall Street Journal [wsj.com] (expensive subscription required) and it said that in point of fact - as also backed by articles in Fortune [fortune.com] and Forbes [forbes.com] - that Sony is losing the format war to HD-DVD, due to low adoption rates by pr0n providers, low sales of the PS3 consoles, and labels shunning the format. Perhaps if someone were prognosticating back in October 2007, such a forecast might have seemed reasonable, but the post-Christmas sales figures in the US and Japan as well as worldwide show that adoption rates are sub-par.

I constantly see people mention that the console war is a "Marathon not a Sprint" which, from what I have seen, is completely wrong. The console war is a sprint to the point where developers simply are forced to heavily support your system; if you have enough of a lead at this point you tend to have support at the expense of other systems.

I don't know where the point is, and I don't know when any of the systems will hit it, but it is foolish to assume that the PS3 will have an easy time catching up in 2008/2009 simply because it has better graphics.

I totally agree. The "Marathon" analogy just doesn't work in this business. A snowball is probably a better analogy. Once a console gets going, it pulls in developers and consumers alike, which then just feed off each other. It's an all out race to convince the developers that you have a product that consumers will buy into. You don't accomplish that, it's all over, marathon or not.

Actually, the Marathon analogy does work. The problem is people just don't know anything about Marathons.In a Marathon, there's generally a nice pack of people leading the way. Almost like the Tour de France, this pack has benefits both psychological and physiological. They're keeping each other to pace, slicing the wind for each other etc.

It can be very hard in a Marathon to break from the pack because you lose the support it provides. It can be done, but it's hard. However, a good Marathon runner will onl

Are these people all getting paid by Sony, or something? Seriously. IANAGA, but it's not rocket science to be able to know the main driving forces behind the console gaming market. The _only_ customers the PS3 attracts are the techno-whores with lots of disposable income, extreme fans of a small handful of exclusives, and people who want a "cheap" Blu-Ray player while it still seems like it could end up being akin to buying a betamax player.
The main factors that drive the console market:
1) Available games. The 360 currently leads the pack, and may continue to do so for some time. It may be passed by the Wii at some point, but is unlikely to be passed by the PS3.
1a) Ease of development. The 360 and Wii are a _hell of a lot_ easier to develop games for than the PS3, and cheaper, too.
2) Total cost of ownership. The 360 and Wii cost less (the Wii a lot less) and the Wii's games cost less. That makes them a lot more attractive to the average consumer thank the PS3.
Exclusive titles, though a definite boost to sales, don't even really factor into the big picture. The Gamecube had several exclusives in franchises that had a great many fans, yet that didn't somehow propel them to the top last generation, and the GC was _cheaper_ than its competitors.
Seriously, I can analogize this situation pretty easily: PC vs. Mac. Apple was top dog back in the pre-GUI days, and they went on to make the Mac. PCs, however, were cheaper, and had more third party support, and got more software. By the logic of a lot of these analysts, the Mac should have come out on top, which is pretty far from what actually happened.:P

I tend to agree with you, but I would like to point out that ease of programming has very little influence on a company's decision as to which console to run on. I don't mean to put down all you programmers out there, but programmers are at the bottom of the totem pole. The designers and marketting staff are going to make that decision for you, and the producers are going to listen to them. Programming makes up a very very small part of the time, work, and money that goes into making a game. If exclusivity

So what?I know, they've been involved in all kinds of terrible anti-customer sorts of things lately. The fact is, I've never been unhappy with a Sony product. I think that their product quality is excellent. My portable CD player would be stolen or misplaced before breaking down, while I've lost two competing brands to a mis-aligned laser. They consistently had better battery life in their portable products than their competitors. PS/2 is an amazing platform; it's 4 years old now, and there's still new titl

Really, if your standard for technology products is reliability and nothing else, history would suggest you'd be a Nintendo fan.

I'm glad that you've gotten good use from your Sony products, but why would that stop you from giving competing products a fair shake? Sure, the PSP has some good games, but it's hard to build a case that the PSP has a better library than the DS. I mean, Hotel Dusk _alone_...

I remember watching a video online of some teenagers who wanted to destroy their Gamecube. They hitched it up by a chain or rope to the back of their truck and dragged it along a dirt road at about 30-40 mph. The thing was bouncing everywhere, twisting and turning in the air before crashing back down on the rocky ground.They took it home afterwards, plugged everything in and were still able to play SSB:M no problem.

Then they took a baseball bat to the thing, that did it in, but only barely. The beast still

Disclaimer, I work for MS, so I'm technically a 360 guy... although what I may next may surprise some of you...

PS/2 is an amazing platform; it's 4 years old now, and there's still new titles being released for it.

I have to say that the PS2 can probably be considered one of the best video game platforms of all time. It would definately rank up there with the NES or SNES in my book. Reason? It's not so much the PS2 itself, but the amazing library of games it had. It pretty much had all of the major franchi

Sony are really a mixed bag. They're usually reasonably good, except for a few rather high-profile proprietary technologies that they've attempted to force onto consumers. I assume you never had the misfortune of owning a Minidisc or MicroMV recorder. On the flipside, our family has a Sony TV from 15 years ago which still works absolutely perfectly. In the same period we've had it, we've gone through around four other (non-Sony) sets.That said, it's interesting to note that for every dodgy new piece of prop

Their system will age faster due to the lack of high-end graphics and HD resolution...

The near constant thing I hear people say about the Wii is the game play. So if the key compliment to the Wii is not the graphics then I'm not seeing how the Wii will age faster...because of its lack of HD graphics. Perhaps most notably is that people who aren't gamers are also talking about the game play.

the "lack of HD" is really lack of 720 and 1080 resolutions, though supposedly the hardware could put out 720i but nintendo doesn't allow it in firmware because game performance would be unacceptable at those resolutions

the "lack of HD" is really lack of 720 and 1080 resolutions, though supposedly the hardware could put out 720i but nintendo doesn't allow it in firmware because game performance would be unacceptable at those resolutions

The Wii does 480p (and 16:9) which by Definition is EDTV. 720, and 1080 are HD. The PS2 and X-Box has a few games in 720p, and even 1080i. Since the Wii more powerful than the X-Box 1, there isn't a technical reason why they can't support this.

I have to ask how the casual gamer reacts when he is first exposed to Oblivion or Gears of War.

That experience varies, some people like the graphics while others dislike the violence. I can tell you that in my experience, all the non-gamers and casual gamers who have seen it reacted surprisingly well to the Wii's control scheme and had no complaints. Wii Sports was really the first killer app for people who wouldn't consider themselves video gamers, with Rayman:RR and Wario Ware being excellent follow-ups t

If you become one, send me a link. I'd read your drivel over their anyday.

Why? Because you go out on a limb. Everything the guys in the articles said was about as vague and uncommital as it comes. One guy even went so far as to note everything could change on him and ruin his predictions! While that was honest of him, the least he could have done was be somewhat more specific with his predictions.

I was surprised by how good the analyst opinions were. They all pretty much said the same thing: Wii is doing well, MS is on track, and Sony is lagging a bit now... but it's still too early to say who the long-term market leader will be. I think that's definately the right approach to take.

In contrast, here's a typical fanboy view of all the consoles:

WiiPro: Wii-mote rules! It's all about the innovation and gameplay. Sony and MS have none of that, so they're doomed! Who cares about HD? Look at the holiday sales! We are DEFINATELY going to win.Con: The Wii was doomed from the start when they released the hardware specs. HD is the wave of the future. The "waggle" is just a gimmick, no one is going to want a "GameCube 1.5" months from now. Nintendo is DOOMED.

Xbox 360Pro: First to 10 million baby! Also, see how Sony is losing exclusives left and right. Xbox Live all the way. Finally, Halo 3 babeeee! We are DEFINATELY going to win.Con: M$ should go back to making Windows. 360 is failing in Japan, and red-lights are everywhere! M$ is DOOOMED.

Playstation 3Pro: Blu-ray all the way baby! PS3 is the real next-gen and HD. Also, the PS2 is still selling like hot-cakes. Finally, you can't deny the power of MGS4 and FFXIII. We are DEFINATELY going to win.Con: Batteries exploding, root kits, and constant PR fiascos. Also, PS3s sitting on shelves everywhere? $ony is DOOMED!

Certainly, there are lots of both truth and falseness to the statements above, which is why fanboys keep making them. However, it's still way too early to tell anything, especially when consoles generally last for years and perceptions change quickly. Remember how doomed many people thought Nintendo was when they first announced the "Wii" name? Or how silly the DS seemed, compared to the sexiness of the PSP? Or about how solid the PlayStation brand was a year and half ago?

LOL, pretty funny how all three of your fanbois misspelled "definitely" in the same way!:-)
Joking aside, I think you're absolutely right -- the only people who are making bold predictions now are either (a) fans of one of the platforms, or (b) paid by the creators of the platforms, or (c) clueless idiots.
Personally, I think Sony will win in the long term, precisely because Sony is thinking in the long term. I bet the Sony execs don't give a damn how much they're losing on each PS3 unit, while the PS2

LOL, pretty funny how all three of your fanbois misspelled "definitely" in the same way!:-)

Argh, "definately" is my Achilles' heel of spelling. I didn't mean to spell it incorrectly, although in that context, I guess it does make sense.;)

Joking aside, I think you're absolutely right -- the only people who are making bold predictions now are either (a) fans of one of the platforms, or (b) paid by the creators of the platforms, or (c) clueless idiots. Personally, I think Sony will win in the long term, pre

Certainly, there are lots of both truth and falseness to the statements above, which is why fanboys keep making them.

What the heck is that supposed to mean, exactly? Fanboys keep making the statements above, because they are both true and false? Because they contain both truth and not-truth? Becase they are simultaneously both correct and incorrect?

If you'd said something like "Certainly each of these viewpoints has a grain of truth buried somewhere in it, which is what fanboys cling to" I'd have been al

I guess we should give these analysts some credit for not going wild on the predictions of X company's victory, but they were still rather vague and at the same time uncommittal in their prognostications.I'm not a market analyst, and I'm also not a fanboy (though I've been accused of being one for each system in turn). Perhaps my own predictions have simply been lucky of late, but I did believe that the DS and the Wii would succeed before it was popular to think so, though the systems have out performed my

Look I upgrade my PC about every 2 years.Since nintendo is making money on every console sold, whats preventing them from releasing much more powerful version in a year or 2. It could be as powerful as PS3 or X-Box but quite inexpensive because all of the components become cheaper by then.They could call it next generation:)I would buy it - Wii costs as much as my graphic card on PC. (And I replace it every 18 months)

There is definately precedent with Nintendo doing this. All you need to do is look at the

Isn't the goal to sell a profitable product that people like?The Wii is there, sales are strong because it's fun, they're making a profit and people are happy. This is win for Nintendo. BTW I bought a Wii and Zelda and it's my first Nintendo product.

Xbox360 has the critical mass to encourage continued third party development, lots of games == happy people. Again this is a win.

PS3 most powerful, lots of people like power and they'll pay for it. I think the PS3 will remain a usable console well into the next

With due respects to these "experts", the race for videogame supremacy will be over before 2008/2009. The next generation of consoles will probably be out in 2009.

I'm really surprised the "experts" have missed the obvious point here...

I think MS released the XBox360 about a year earlier than Sony anticipated. I believe Microsoft did this to force Sony to release a console 9-12 months before they were ready. Sony essentially abandoned the very profitable PS2 way too soon to push the PS3 and compete with the Xbox360. In my opinion, Sony managed in the space of 6 months to throw away a commanding lead in videogames. Now they're in 3rd place for the "new" generation. And it's going to be a tough hole to dig out of.

You can argue that the new PS3 has wonderful technology, you can talk about the wonderful WiFi, BluRay, and all of that is true. But people are going into stores and looking at $250 for a Wii (which is still hard to get), $300 for an Xbox360 (even if that price is deceptive), and then $500/600 for the PS3. I think it's a tough sale.

And again, listening to these experts talk about how the PS3 will come from behind in 2-3 years to take over the lead... it's never been done in consoles, I doubt it will happen now.

I'm really surprised at Sony. They know as well as anyone how easily the lead in videogames can be lost. And despite all that they threw that lead away.

If I was Sony, I'd cut prices by $100-150 across the board, get the cheaper unit into stores, get some games out there and advertise the heck out of the console itself. I think they're in trouble at the moment, and the game is MS's to lose right now.

Console makers can not sustain a 3 year release cycle. Many games are in development for that long. Even the Xbox, which had an incredibly short run due to having production cut the instant the 360 was released, was around for five years.

The PS2 will likely have a 10+ year run, the PS1 had 11 years, the SNES had 13 years...

In 2009 we will be seeing the next generation of consoles. The war will have been over long before then. I'm not so sure the analysts have been following previous consoles, but the first two years pretty much show who is the premiere console, and then we have a year or two left before the next one is out. Sony and Microsoft need to lower their prices big time if they ever hope to outlast what the Wii is capable of. If sales continue through 2007, the Wii will be the next "Playstation".

Are you insane? Are the mods insane? You think the next generation of consoles will be out in 2009? What kind crack are you smoking? Console life cycles are 4 years at the very least (xbox->xbox360). It is more commonly 5-6 years. I don't think MS will have such a short lifecycle on their console again. The only reason they were so fast is that they wanted to correct the mistakes they made from their entry in to the market.

Now you may be right that the console war will be over by then because one

I would lay money that at E3 2009 all three companies (Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft) will be talking about their "upcomming" gaming systems which will be released in 2010/2011.The only reason that the PS3 is a tough sale at this point is lack of games worth playing. It has one game that doesn't suck.

I would say that the PS3's biggest problems are that it is really expensive, has too few games and offers little benefit for the majority of people who don't have HDTVs; in 2008/2009 it will be a far more modera

I think it's funny that none of the analysts mention pre-installed base of portable units. The 'base station' aspect of these new consoles will play into the equation for sure.Download services and hand-held integration hopefully will play a big part in this generation. A wireless Four Swordswould be great, and SOCOM3 has some unlockables when you plugyour PSP into a PS2 USB port. I also remember hearing that PS3 has a download service already in Japan.

Do these people's opinions really matter? It seems like they speak with 10,000 analysts, get 40,000 diffrent answers, and when one is correct (suprise suprise) they tout it as some achievement, beacuse they guessed the right number.

Who cares who wins in 2007? I sure dont. If you like Wii, you'll go Wii. if you like PS3, guess what, you'll go PS3. Xbox? Do a little dance and make a 360!

The only true winner is the consumer, because they have a choice, IMHO. Analyze that.

There are three analysts on TFA and the first two basically don't declare a winner. It's far too early in the game, so it is better if they don't risk such estimates based on wild speculation.Now there is the third, "respected" analyst. Example argument from TFA:"If I'm right, Sony will end up winning the high-definition format war, and once there are millions of Blu-ray enabled PS3s floating around, I think we will see sharper graphics on PS3 games compared to Xbox 360 games."

If sony drops thier price do you think it will go unaswered by either nintendo or Microsoft??? Its very very likely that Microsoft would follow suit and do the same if not being the market leader in doing so... In wich case Sony will be grasping at the possiblity of making some sort of profit... Even though the cheap ps2 is making them a killing at the moment.
I work in the gaming industry... My prediction at the pricing of consoles over the next year maybe two years is that Xbox will have a newer model ou

The Majority of Certified Analysts in 2006 did not beat the S&P 500 with their portfolio rec's.That's right "MAJORITY". Which actually means you'd be better off doing the opposite of what they suggested.

I just read "A Random Walk Down Wall Street" --- highly recommended if anyone is interested in themathematical provability of analysts' incompetance. Any analyst who believes he is operating inan enviornment with a limited enough set of variables to render a prediction, is inherently mathematicallyinco

If sony actually managed to get a $300 PS3 out, it would change dramatically the number of sold consoles.

This is a true statement. Notice the street price in Japan has already been slashed, even before the EU launches, as they try to deal with lower console sales there. Prices haven't dropped in the US market, but the product isn't moving either, according to a number of online and print articles in various business sources - WSJ, CNN Business, CNBC, etc.

With the massive console losses already in place, it might be better to realize who the real competition is - Nintendo's Wii console - and fight them on price. Because, frankly, Sony has a better console at the same price point of the Wii, at least on graphics and speed, even if they don't have a full-fledged motion controller.

The Wii is indeed killing them, and if there was sufficient stock, it would probably be killing the 360 as well. But considering the high-end technology used in the PS3, and the

Personally I see the winning game console being a PC. With the falling cost of high performance hardware getting to the point where the open system is cost competitive on the initial purchase and it will play sufficiently attractive games, then the closed console systems will disappear (unless they want to give them away free, as per the M$ prediction, in that case I will pre order a few thousand for the parts).

As for mass media forecasts, they will align with which ever manufacturer pays for the most adv

So if the hardware price is equal, why would the consumer be enough of an idiot to get stuck on a closed system and pay 20% more for all their content. Consoles are aimed at people who can not afford full fledged open hardware apart from the minority technology collectors and as the price has risen it has started to squeeze them out.

Sales in PC games has actually risen, there is just so much available that sales for any individual game has fallen. Let alone a full range of free games available for PC as w

The reasons so many people are going with consoles instead of computers are:Multiplayer on one system (thus more directly social)Larger screen (and increasingly, equal resolution to PC)Easy setup/compatibility (plug it in, put the disc in, it works)Simple controlsEasy online play (at least for the Xbox/360.. PS3 is still a question mark)

Consoles are not aimed at "people who can not afford full fledged open hardware", they are aimed at people who want an easy, fun gaming experience. No matter what your pers

What you're really talking here is demographics. If you're selling to mothers, the Wii has a great story to tell. Low price, easy setup, and games that won't make her eyes turn really big and make her whack the box with a fireplace poker. Plus, she may even enjoy some of the games herself.But have we forgotten there actually still exists a market for a certain demographic that has come to be known as the "hardcore gamer"? Yes, I've heard lots of arguments that Wii players are "real" gamers and are "dedi

If sony actually managed to get a $300 PS3 out, it would change dramatically the number of sold consoles.

Yes, but would it sell twice as many? The premium PS3 SKU is $600 USD. To break even on revenue, Sony would have to sell twice as many. I really don't see that happening. Certainly, you'd get a lot more people buying the systems, but a significant number of people still sitting on their hands, waiting for actual games to come out, or an actual winner for the HD-DVD/Blu-ray battle to be decided.

I think a point to be made is that Sony may need to take hits in revenue and profit if they want the PS3, and blu-ray, to succeed. Dropping the price would definately hurt their revenue, but it would also encourage PS3 sales.Now, it may be that they aren't prepared to handle increased PS3 sales. There may be unsold PS3s, but they are preparing for another launch in March. If they can have a very good supply for the EU, it might encourage the other markets as well. If/when supply far exceeds demand we may se

Well, if you notice DVD empire has Blu-Ray winning the week by a wide margin, the month by a pretty narrow margin and losing the year; this would be quite likely if Blu-Ray ended up having a much better couple of weeks of releases than HD-DVD and not really suggestive of any larger trend.Eproduct wars has far more statistics and many of the stats are not important for sales; most of the sales stats are pretty split and will change week to week.

You either didn't read your own link, or you decided to gloss over a pretty important quote regarding the "Debbie Does Dallas...Again" release: "The title will also debut simultaneously on HD DVD, and list price for either version is $39.95." Based on that, and the fact that other companies (such as Wicked and Digital Playground) are already going HD DVD, it doesn't look like any of the major porn players are planning to go BD exclusive.

Same reasons, as for not wanting one....1) Too expensive2) Don't need/want a Blu-Ray player3) No games4) Too expensive

Which is why, if Sony can get the price down under $300 in a couple years, everything could change. Two of your reasons for not wanting a PS3 would be instantly invalidated, and depending on how many PS3 games and movies are released in the meantime, the other two might be as well.

I don't expect Sony to give up on the PS3 before 2009, either; they're some stubborn bastards. How long did it

Yes, but a couple of years is an eternity in a race to convince developers that your product isn't a flop. This is NOT a marathon, it's a snowball race. There's also a chance that in 2-years, there's about a 50% chance that the HD wars will be lost to HD-DVD, in which case, the blu-ray player is practically useless. Plus, don't hold your breath for the PS3 to fall to $300 in two years. They're already taking a loss far greater than any other console in history, they simply can't afford to drop it down much

If you change the search for PS3 instead of "playstation 3" and use "," instead of "." to seperate PS3 from Wii, the trend seem to be that PS3 is consistently above XBOX360, and almost identical to Wii. But in the very latest results, Wii has outrun PS3.If you look at at the cities/regional/language bars below, PS3 is consistently in top for all cities, regions and languages, with Wii and XBOX 360 fighting for the second spot. However, Wii is seriously handicapped by being known under a different name for

Anyways, as was already noted, Google trends don't exactly indicate hard scientific data, and especially sales. The 360 outsold the Wii 3/2 in the US over the holidays and the PS3 3/1 yet it lagged behind both of them in the Google trends for that period.

Those trends you linked are actually just linking search terms. In this case since you used "playstation 3" instead of "PS3" you are seeing the wrong data.

Your very first trend when properly entered actually shows the PS3 slaughtering the other two. Not that people searching for information is going to translate into relevant sales numbers when the console prices are so different.

You do realize that investment firms use analyst's data to make decisions on stocks and bonds worth tens of millions of dollars. These aren't some fanboys sitting around pulling data out of their ass. Unless what you think can move stock prices, I'm not too interested. They all pretty much said the same thing and their analysis seems to make a lot of sense. But hey, your "friends are all gamers", so obviously know more than guys who spend 10 hours a day studying the industry.

> You do realize that investment firms use analyst's data to make decisions on stocks and bonds> worth tens of millions of dollars. These aren't some fanboys sitting around pulling data out of> their ass.No, they are some con artists pulling data out of their ass. I have never seen an "analyst" being right in any prediction. They seem to score below what random chance would give.

The reason they are used none the less is that the "deciosion makers" are afraid to make decisions, and use the expensi

It is amazing how such false and misleading information was modded Interesting. Before you call "bullshit", it might help if you provided evidence using more accurate test variables to trend popularity.

Firstly, many people refer to the "Playstation 3" as the "PS3". Secondly, it _might_ help your test results if you used "Playstation 3, Wii" instead of "Playstation 3.wii". So, let's take a look at the _real_ trend:

The thing that I would wonder about is the purpose behind the searches. For example, I know for certain that I'm not going to be a PS3 within the next year (unless something huge happens on the price front). Yet, I might still do a search for "PS3" to find out news about the console. Similarly, because I'm not going PS3 and the standalone Blu-ray players are way too expensive, I won't buy one of those, either. But, I may still do a "blu-ray" search in order to perhaps find out if there are any new playe

In the home theater market, the driving force is more likely to be Disney and Time-Warner. Porn may obsess the Geek, but that is not why the family room gets the 60" DLP projection set and the XBox 360.

Personally I believe HD-DVD will win or both formats with coexist because -1) HD-DVD is cheaper to manufacture2) Porn has chosen HD-DVD as it's main format3) Blu-Ray is Sony's format - this makes, some people hate it, period.4) Much more expensive to manufactureWhile I agree, I think it is important to point out that the pr0n industry hasn't chosen HD-DVD. Quite a few companies were actually behind Blu-Ray until recently when it came out that companies are not allowed to make XXX Blu-Ray discs. XXX compan

"Sony" does not mean "console", genius. Sony is backing Blu-ray, and that statement says Blu-ray will win; it doesn't really say anything about consoles, except that the PS3 is currently Sony's main Blu-ray player.

The analyst is intimating that PS3's success, as a game console, will hinge on the success of BR.

Of course, said analist either also seems to have a very selective memory, or stock in Sony, since his "best guess" is that BR 'wins' the format war.

You kidding me? Racing has been done right, Excite Truck is fun and exciting, the only thing that really hurts it is no solid multiplayer options, there should have been online support for it.Red Steel was a broken game that should not have been on sale, that was Ubisoft being retarded, and while Call of Duty 3 has people complaining about not being able to play for more than an hour before their left arm gives in and they cannot keep their direction set right - Nintendo does advise regular breaks from con

Greetings to you Voice of Reason. I see you have gotten lost and posted here at the games section of Slashdot. I recommend you install Fanboi Filter 2007 as well as Flame Reflector 2.0. You may also need to make sure your system is plugged into a wall socket of intelligence in order to keep your battery IQ from draining.